cooperating technical partners information exchange€¦ · monday, june 18, 2018 3:00 - 5:00 pm:...
TRANSCRIPT
Cooperating Technical Partners Information Exchange
Flood Mapping for the Nation:How FEMA Tracks Progress
and Validity Using CNMS
Audio and Web Settings
Open and hide your control panel using the orange arrow button at top left corner
• Choose “Computer audio” to use computer speakers or headphones
• Choose “Phone call” to dial in using the information provided
Submit questions & comments via the Questions panel
Participation
Webinar Logistics
• All lines will be automatically be muted.
• Use the Question window in the control panel to submit your question or comment to the Flood Science Center Organizer.
• Select questions will be read to the presenter and answered.
• Questions not asked during the webinar will be answered and posted to the CTP Webinar page.
• Certified Floodplain Managers are eligible for 1 Continuing Education Credit for participating in this webinar.
• You must have registered individually and indicated you are a CFM at time of registration.
• Eligibility for CEC is dependent on your participation in poll questions and time spent viewing the webinar, as determined by the webinar software.
• Attending this webinar in a group setting or only viewing the recording is NOT eligible for CEC.
Continuing Education Credits
• To suggest future CTP webinar topics, please contact Alan Lulloff at [email protected] or type a suggested topic into the Questions panel today
• ASFPM CFM CECs will be automatically applied
• Certificates of Attendance will be emailed, please contact [email protected] with any certificate issues
• Follow-up email with link to slides and recording will be sent next week
Thank You for Joining Us!
Additional Logistics
Poll for Future CTP Webinar Topic
Of the following topics, which one would you like to see as a future CTP
Information Exchange webinar?
Monday, June 18, 2018
3:00 - 5:00 pm: National Policy Issues Cooperating Technical Partners
7:00 – 9:00 pm: Off-site Cooperating Technical Partners Social
Tuesday, June 19, 2018
Noon - 1:30 pm: Keynote Luncheon (Incl. with FULL Registration [$45 a la carte])
• CTP Recognition Awards presented by Brock Long (or his representative)
1:45 - 3:15 pm: Concurrent Session B7: CTP Initiatives
• Performance Measures for the CTP Program: How to Make Them Work for Your Mapping Project
• Colorado Hazard Mapping Program (CHAMP) - Lessons Learned
• Missouri PIR Counties with Risk MAP Infusion - Bootheel of Missouri
CTP Events at 2018 ASFPM Conference in Phoenix
Thursday, June 21, 2018
2:30 - 5:00 pm: FEMA CTP Best Practices from the Field
• A Special Presentation from the 1st Annual CTP Recognition Program: San Antonio River Authority (SARA), Illinois State Water Survey (ISWS) and the Kentucky Division of Water (KDOW)
4:00 - 5:30 pm: Concurrent Session J7: Mapping Toolbox Innovations
• FEMA’s CNMS Database - More Than Metrics: Hurricane Harvey Disaster Response
• Texas Water Development Board Cooperating Technical Partner -Statewide Prioritization Tool
• Leveraging Coastal Data: The Development of a Coastal MultiFrequency Geospatial Data Catalog
CTP Events at 2018 ASFPM Conference in Phoenix
ASFPM Mapping and Engineering Standards Committee
Cooperating Technical Partners Sub-committee
Co-chairs:
• Thuy Patton, PE, CFMColorado Water Conservation Board
• Carey JohnsonKentucky Department for Environmental Protection
Goals:
• Identify common concerns
• Provide opportunities for information exchange
• Identify training needs
• Promote and document the value of CTPs
Agenda
Introduction - Alan Lulloff
Overview of CNMS - Erik Danielson & Bradford Hartley
1) Riverine 2) Coastal 3) FEMA Regional Service Centers
CTP CNMS Coordination - Matthew Armstrong & Carey Johnson
Using CNMS for Providing Engineering Models Access - Mary Presnail
Questions/Discussion
ASFPM Report: Flood Mapping for the Nation (2013)
http://no.floods.org/MappingTheNation
• Estimated the total cost to provide floodplain mapping for all communities (Biggert-Waters Flood Insurance Reform Act of 2012)
• The Nation has invested $4.3 billion in flood mapping to date
Flood hazard mapping developed for 1.1 m stream miles
Guides development that saves over $1 billion/year in flood damages
• Flood Mapping for the Nation
National Hydrography Dataset: 3.5 million stream miles
Mapping Cost: $4.5 billion to $7.5 billion to complete
Cost to then maintain accurate and up-to-date flood maps ranges from $116 million to $275 million annually
Coordinated Needs Management Strategy (CNMS) Overview
• Inventory of FEMA’s riverine and coastal mapped special flood hazard areas.
• Comprehensive approach to managing mapping needs.
• Used to organize, store and analyze flood hazard mapping needs as well as document study reaches that meet FEMA’s validity standards.
• A Geospatial Database that tracks:
New, Validated or Updated Engineering (NVUE)
Unverified study reaches (need of restudy)
Flood mapping requests
CNMS Components
CNMS Inventory (Riverine and Coastal)
• flooding source centerlines(streamlines) and coast lines that contain FEMA’s inventory of flood hazard studies.
CNMS Requests
• polygons or points that identify areas where study or mapping updates are desired.
CNMS Technical Reference
CNMS Data Development
• Workflow and process, data input/output
CNMS Data Entry Process
• Feature class/attribute descriptions, study phase updates
Appendices
• Validation assessments, data dictionary, QC tool
CNMS Geodatabase Schema
ArcGIS File Geodatabase
• Data model diagram and data dictionary are included in the CNMS Technical Reference
• Attributes support FEMA program & project planning
• Captures effective and ongoing study attributes
• Updated throughout Flood Study Process
• Maintained by each FEMA Region
CNMS Data Viewer
• Maintained by CDS – updated quarterly
• Community engagement tool; CNMS requests capture
https://msc.fema.gov/cnms/
What is NVUE?New, Valid, Or Updated Engineering
• Engineering studies that adequately identify the level of flood
risk identified on a community’s flood insurance rate map are
classified in CNMS as “VALID – NVUE COMPLIANT”
• Studies found to be deficient are classified as “UNVERIFIED”
• Valid studies require re-assessment by FEMA every five years
Validation assessment procedures for Detailed, Approximate and
Coastal Studies
Changes in topography, hydrology & land development are
evaluated
Unverified studies can only become Valid through a restudy
Calculating the NVUE Metric
NVUE AttainedValid or Being Studied Stream Miles
past Preliminary issuance
CNMSDatabase
Total NVUE Calculation
+
Regional Purchased Milesprior to Preliminary issuance
NVUE Initiated
P4 Database
FEMA’s Project Planning and Purchasing Portal
Why is NVUE Important?
Measure of FEMA’s Program, reported to Congress• FEMA Regions submit CNMS Database (quarterly rollup)
• Report purchased miles in P4 annually, maintained quarterly
FEMA target of 80% NVUE by FY23
Tier Inventory
• New classification in CNMS (2017)
• TIER field in CNMS describes maturity scale of flood hazard data products
TIER 0Known to be flood prone (i.e. draining greater than 1 square mile) but not yet identified as SFHA on a regulatory FIRM.
TIER 1 SFHA is not available in digital format.
TIER 2 SFHA is available as a digital product, but not known to be model-backed.
TIER 3 Is available as a digital product, model-backed and consistent with high quality elevation data (USGS Quality Level (QL) 2 equivalence or better). (This tier should serve as meeting all current Risk MAP technical requirements).
TIER 4 SFHA is available as a digital product, and including enhanced analyses such as future land use, or future climate-informed analyses.
Tier Inventory
FEMA Target of 100% digital & modernized (TIER 3) by 2023
Poll Question
Have you used a CNMS database or FEMA’s CNMS web viewer in the past?
Riverine Inventory
Mid 2014-Current (Assessments)
Early 2009 (Phase 1)
Late 2009 (Phase 2)
Early 2010 (Phase 2.5)
Late 2010 (Phase 3)
2012 (Project Maintenance)
S_Studies_Ln Feature Class
Riverine Inventory
Background Data
• Reach ID
• MIP Case#
• FIPS/CID/ HUC
• Flood Zone
• Stream Name
• Study Type
• Miles
FEMA Tracking
• Source of Line
• Status Type
• Tiers
• Risk Products
• BLE
• FBS
Effective Study
• Date of Model
• Hydro Model
• Hydra Model
Assessment Checks
• Critical Checks
• Secondary Checks
• Check Totals
Being Studied
• MIP Case#
• Flood Zone
• Study Type
• Hydro Model
• Hydra Model
Assessment Check Info
• Comments
• Source
• URL
Critical Checks Secondary Checks
C1 - Major change in gage record S1 - Use of rural regression equations in urban areas
C2 - Significant change in discharge S2 - Repetitive loss outside the SFHA
C3 - Model methodology not appropriate S3 - 50% Increase in impervious Area
C4 - Major flood control structures added or removed
S4 - >1 and <5 new/removed hydraulic structures
C5 - Channel outside SFHA S5 - Channel/shoreline improvements
C6 - 5 new or removed hydraulic structures S6 - Availability of better topographic data
C7 - Stream channel area change (scour) S7 - Land use change since effective
S8 - Significant storm & high water mark data
S9 - Release of updated regression equations
1 Critical and/or 4 Secondary Fails = Unverified
Riverine Detailed Checks
Check C1 data inputs:• New & existing USGS gages
Check performed if:• Gage with at least 1 year of record after
study date and drainage area 50-150% within study area
• Otherwise, C1 automatically passes
A major event in gage
record since study date
will fail the check
• “Major” defined as > 1%
annual chance flood recorded
after study date or flood record
Riverine Detailed Check (C1)
Riverine Detailed Check (C6S4)
Check C6S4 data inputs:
• Recent ortho, effective profile(s), DFIRM database, and LOMRs
Check is a direct comparison of structures between profile and recent ortho
• C6 fails if 5 or more new or removed structures
• S4 fails if 4 or less new or removed structures
Special considerations:
• Effective LOMRs need to be supplemented to reflect current conditions
• Check for mention of bridges that were intentionally not modeled/omitted from profile.
• Document name and location of new/removed structure
Approximate Checks
A1 - Availability of better topographic data
A2 - Newer regression equations with significant change outside of standard deviation
A3 - Land use change since effective date
A4 - Study model backed
A5 (Optional) - First Order Approximate (FOA) comparison
Riverine Approximate Checks
1 Check Fails = Unverifiedor
1 Check Fails + Pass (A5) = Valid1 Check Fails + Fail (A5) = Unverified
Riverine Approximate Check (A2)
Check A2 data inputs: Used regression equations
Any new regression equations
StreamStats / ArcHydro
Check performed if:
• Newer regression equations exist and compare current regression equations to effective looking at Q100 (discharge)
Check fails if the Q100 falls outside of 1 standard error
User Defined Critical Elements User Defined Secondary Elements
EC1 - Community based flood studies performed
ES1 - LOMA count changes in the SFHA
EC2 - ES2 - Building count changes in the floodplain
EC3 - ES3 - Is the hydraulic model 3.5 years or older
EC4 - ES4 -
Riverine User Defined Elements
CNMS can accommodate custom assessment checks unique to different geographies:
North Carolina Floodplain Mapping Program (NCFMP)
Coastal Inventory
Mid 2015 (Coastal Kick-off)
Late 2016 (Coastal Finalized)
Early 2017 (Coastal Maintenance)
Late 2017 (Assessments)
S_Coastal_Ln Feature Class
Coastal Inventory
Background Data
• Creach ID
• MIP Case #
• FIPS/CID/ HUC
• Study Name
• Study Type
• Miles
FEMA Tracking
• Source of Line
• Status Type
• Tiers
• Risk Products
• FBS
• Populated Coast
Effective Study
• Date of Modeling
• Surge Model
• Setup Meth.
• Runup Model
• Erosion Meth.
• Overland Model
• Wave Model
Assessment Checks
• Critical Checks
• Secondary Checks
• Check Totals
Being Studied
• MIP Case #
• Study Type
• Surge Model
• Setup Meth.
• Runup Model
• Erosion Meth.
• Overland Model
• Wave Model
Assessment Check Info
• Comments
• Source
• URL
Critical Checks Secondary Checks
C1 - Storm events SWL exceeds the 1% SWEL S1 - Starting wave conditions no longer appropriate
C2 - Statistically significant storm intensity data
S2 - Bathy/topo meet FEMA Standards
C3 -Changes in ice coverage (Great Lakes Only)
S3 - Significant changes to land use or vegetation
C4 - Effective models inaccurate S4 - Repetitive loss properties outside of coastal SFHA
C5 - Coastal/mapping modeling changes or improvements from effective study
S5 - Patterns of LOMRs indicated from coastal SFHA
C6 - Shoreline erosion S6 - High water marks collected since effective study
C7 -Existing coastal structures adequate in providing flood protection
1 Critical and/or 3 Secondary Fails= Unverified
Coastal Checks
FEMA Regional Service Centers (RSC)
FEMA Regional Service Centers (RSC)
FEMA Regional Service Centers (RSC)
Vision
RiskMAP will deliver quality data that increases public awareness and leads to action that
reduces risk to life and property
CNMS supports FEMA’s Program Planning
• Awareness of ongoing studies
• Identify mapping needs
• What streams are expiring (valid)
Kentucky Floodplain Management Program
• Kentucky Division of Water has statutory & regulatory authority over all development (dams, levees, fill, structures, etc.) in SHFA
• 7 FP management staff; 5 dam safety staff; 3 CTP staff
• all collaborate on water resources-related activities
• KDOW became a CTP in 1999; active CTP in 2005
• Since 2005, all SFHAs up to the 1 mi2 watershed have been mapped or remapped with model-backed data
• KDOW has developed a web resource to allow for “point and click” 1% annual chance flood elevations and model download capabilities in Zone A SFHAs at: http://watermaps.ky.gov/riskportal
• KDOW leads USACE Silver Jackets activity in KY and participates in state ASFPM chapter: Kentucky Association of Mitigation Managers
Kentucky CTP CNMS Coordination
Local Ownership
• Data collection
• Project updates
• Geometry source
Kentucky CTP CNMS Coordination
Key Benefits
• Mapping Activity Statements/funding requests
• Enhanced Deliverables
• Possible Flood Risk Portal incorporation
Kentucky CTP CNMS Coordination
Database additions
5-year Assessments
• Efficiencies
• Fewer validity surprises
Kentucky CTP CNMS Coordination
Take-aways (FEMA and CTP benefit)
• Improved accuracy
• More detail
• Enhanced deliverables
• Mapping Activity Statements and funding requests
KentuckyCTP USGS NHD Coordination
National Hydrography Dataset (NHD) Stewardship
• Active management/Updates
Stream configuration linework
Historic features
Topographic updates (LiDAR)
Minnesota Floodplain Management Program
• Assist communities with regulating floodplain development
• Floodplain mapping, modeling and technical assistance
• Flood insurance information
• Floodplain training and education
• Review LOMRs for State regulations compliance
• Flood Hazard Mitigation Grant Program
MinnesotaUsing CNMS
• To determine where models should be updated
• For information on the current effective data
• For the foundation to the model download site
• For cost estimation
MinnesotaUsing CNMS
• MnDNR is a Cooperating Technical Partner (CTP)
• FEMA encourages MnDNR to leverage local data
Linking Engineering Modelsto CNMS
GOOD = Get Out Our Data
Linking Engineering Modelsto CNMS
Updating CNMS to match Engineering Model extents
Model Inventory Tracking
Using CNMS as foundation for Engineering Model access
CNMS and Engineering Models
• Work with the Regional Support Center (RSC V) on a county-wide basis when doing CNMS updates.
• Keep track of any changes to send to the RSC
• Future inventory HEC2 models, LOMRs, and no-Rise models.
Poll Question
Which CTP demonstrated their “GOOD” project using CNMS data
to build a public web viewer to download floodplain models?
Regional CTP Coordination
• Transparency
Where assessment work is ongoing and opportunity to review
• Contribution to CNMS Guidelines & Specifications
• RSC notification on new and/or revised guidance
• Database distribution
Entities that Provide Access to Download Engineering Models
• Delaware
• Indiana
• Kentucky
• Maryland
• Minnesota
• North Carolina
• Wisconsin
• Harris County Flood Control District
• Louisville Metropolitan Sewer District
• San Antonio River Authority
• FEMA Flood Risk Study Engineering Library (FRiSEL)
Please contact Alan Lulloff at [email protected] if you are a state,
county, community or regional entity that provides online access to
download hydraulic engineering models and are not on this list.
Entities that Provide Access to Download Engineering Models
CTP Information Exchange Webinar on February 17, 2016
• Accessing Flood Study Engineering Models
Maryland
San Antonio River Authority
Find the slides, recording and additional materials on the CTP Information Exchange website at:
https://www.floodsciencecenter.org/event/ctp-webinar-accessing-flood-study-engineering-models/
Questions&
Discussion
Alan Lulloff (ASFPM) [email protected]
Erik Danielson (Compass) [email protected]
Bradford Hartley Jr. (STARR II) [email protected]
Carey Johnson (KY DNR) [email protected]
Matthew Armstrong (Stantec) [email protected]
Mary Presnail (MN DNR) [email protected]
Poll Question
Please rate this webinar.
CTP Events at 2018 ASFPM Conference in Phoenix
Monday, June 18, 2018
3:00 - 5:00 pm: National Policy Issues Cooperating Technical Partners
7:00 – 9:00 pm: Off-site Cooperating Technical Partners Social
Tuesday, June 19, 2018
Noon - 1:30 pm: Keynote Luncheon - CTP Recognition Awards
1:45 - 3:15 pm: Concurrent Session B7: CTP Initiatives
Thursday, June 21, 2018
2:30 - 5:00 pm: FEMA CTP Best Practices from the Field
4:00 - 5:30 pm: Concurrent Session J7: Mapping Toolbox Innovations
• Certified Floodplain Managers are eligible for 1 Continuing Education Credit for participating in this webinar.
• You must have registered individually and indicated you are a CFM at time of registration.
• Eligibility for CEC is dependent on your participation in poll questions and time spent viewing the webinar, as determined by the webinar software.
• Attending this webinar in a group setting or only viewing the recording is NOT eligible for CEC.
Continuing Education Credits
• To suggest future CTP webinar topics, please contact Alan Lulloff at [email protected] or type a suggested topic into the Questions panel today
• ASFPM CFM CECs will be automatically applied
• Certificates of Attendance will be emailed, please contact [email protected] with any certificate issues
• Follow-up email with link to slides and recording will be sent next week
Thank You for Joining Us!
Closing Comments